Great British Grid: another quango or a sign the Government finally gets it? 

By Olivia White – Director

If there is one reliable trick in British politics, it’s adding “Great British” to the front of your announcement.

So when Andy Burnham stood up yesterday to announce Great British Grid, a new publicly-owned body sitting within Great British Energy, the energy and infrastructure sector paid attention. The announcement reflects Burnham’s wider message that growth, national renewal and optimism are connected. It is an attempt to present infrastructure not as a technical challenge, but as part of a broader vision for Britain’s future.

For an industry that has spent years warning that grid constraints are holding back investment, there will be some encouragement in that.

At the very least, the announcement signals that government now recognises grid reform as one of the UK’s most significant barriers to growth. For too long, developers, investors and businesses ready to build have found themselves stuck in lengthy and often opaque connection processes. Businesses ready to invest have been told they may need to wait years before they can switch on.

That recognition matters.

The challenge is that while much of the sector agrees on the need for improvement, it will be interesting to see if there is a consensus on whether creating a new publicly owned body is the answer.

Perhaps the most interesting element is not Great British Grid itself, but the wider reforms that sit alongside it. The Government has signalled plans to expand self-build connections, giving businesses and developers greater ability to build connection infrastructure themselves rather than relying exclusively on network companies. In theory, that could inject new competition into a process that many in the sector see as slow, inflexible and difficult to navigate.

But there is also a degree of scepticism. Some will question whether adding another organisation into an already complex landscape will speed things up or simply introduce another layer of administration.

As ever, the devil is in the detail, and at this stage there is still plenty we do not know.

Questions remain about how Great British Grid will interact with existing network operators, the role of Ofgem, and whether wider regulatory reform will follow. Without changes that genuinely encourage competition and investment, there is a risk that structural reform alone fails to deliver the pace of change ministers are seeking.

So far, so good for business. But what does any of this mean for the public?

Most people do not spend their evenings trying to understand the difference between electricity generators, transmission operators, distribution network operators, NESO and Ofgem. The institutions that keep the lights on are largely invisible until something goes wrong.

For the wider public, yesterday’s announcement will only really matter if it lowers bills. Yet any benefits are unlikely to be immediate. Grid reform is a long-term endeavour, and the political challenge for Burnham will be maintaining support for a vision whose rewards may take years to materialise.

There is another audience watching closely too: communities living near infrastructure projects.

If new powers sit with a national body, who takes responsibility when concerns emerge locally and how does that fit with Burnham’s devolution argument? Will Great British Grid create clearer accountability, or simply add another institution to an already complicated system? And if government becomes both promoter and decision-maker how will that affect public confidence in the process?

What yesterday’s announcement does show is that government is no longer prepared to treat grid infrastructure as a niche industry concern. It has become a political issue, an economic issue and increasingly a public issue.